Thursday, October 13, 2011

Review: "The Ides of March"

To say that I am apathetic towards politics would be
somewhat of a misstatement. I hate politics; I hate the political system; I
hate what politics do to otherwise intelligent humans; and if I must be honest,
I generally hate politicians. But for some reason, political thrillers intrigue
me. Maybe it’s because the majority of them are all about pointing out the same
holes in the political system that bother me or maybe I just like seeing
politicians, even fictitious ones, suffering. Whatever it is, I’m usually on
board for a well-paced political thriller and as such, I was quite excited
about The Ides of March. In
hindsight, I probably could have tempered my enthusiasm a bit.

Governor Mike Morris (George Clooney) is the type of
presidential candidate that inspires young voters and scares the snot out of
stodgy traditionalists. He is a fresh thinker, filled with the kind of ideas
that you can only get away with in the movies, and a man who refuses to
participate in the shady backroom dealings that plague the political system.
His campaign is run by Paul Zara (Philip Seymour Hoffman), an experienced
campaigner who has put numerous candidates in their rightful positions over the
years. But Morris draws much of his campaign strength from Stephen Meyers (Ryan
Gosling), an idealistic media whiz-kid who serves as second-in-command within
the Morris campaign and will undoubtedly go on to an important post within the
White House. Just as Stephen begins to think the presidential nomination is in
the bag, everything begins to crash around him. A secret meeting with Tom Duffy
(Paul Giamatti), who manages Morris’ opponent, reveals that Stephen’s polls are
wrong and the race is far from over. He then discovers that Molly (Evan Rachel Wood),
an intern with whom he has been cavorting, has a dark secret that threatens not
only him but the campaign itself. With all of his hard work so close to coming
to fruition, Stephen is forced to make decisions that go against his very
nature and the beliefs on which the Morris campaign is built while attempting
to stay one step ahead of the media and his political opponents.

The best thing that I can say about March is that it is a good film and a well-made one at that. As the
writer and director, Clooney does an outstanding of painting an accurate
picture of the political climate. Morris is an appealing candidate, the kind of
guy you might truly consider worthy of a vote if he were not, in fact, a
fictitious person. There is earnestness and a sense of realness to him which is
exactly what he has to show in order to delve into the darker side of politics.
The script isn’t great in the dialogue department (I move to make it a law that
all political films must be written by Aaron Sorkin. Seconded?) but it succeeds
in limiting the scope of the political sphere in which Stephens, Morris, and
the rest operate; that is to say, it doesn’t bog the story down in all the
detail that made your high school government class so painfully boring and
thereby allows the audience to invest without having to remember too much about
how this whole mess works. As someone who (as stated before) hates the
political system and checks out at the words “delegate” and “lobbyist”, I
appreciate this dedication to simplicity while remaining intelligent. All of
the leading actors turn in good performances, though it would be a shock if any
of them didn’t. March is mostly concerned with Gosling’s Stephen but the best
moments belong to PSH and Giamatti, both of whom deliver with impassioned panache
in their limited scenes. Shot selection, cinematography, and the dark contrast
are all strengths and add to the overall “goodness” of the film.

What March isn’t
is a great film. Clooney sets the
table for a dramatic, genre changing (or at least defining) film and the
trailers had me believing this would be an epic achievement. But in the end,
there’s very little punch in March
and not enough substance to fulfill its promise. The ground covered within the
narrative is interesting but old; there’s nothing new or fresh about the twists
and turns that take place and the final reveal(s) are simply not the powerful
moments that I think they were designed to be. March simply isn’t special
and while there’s certainly nothing wrong with that, I think it’s fair to
expect more from a film that has this kind of pedigree. Whether fair or not, if
you tell me Clooney will direct and co-star along with Gosling, PSH, and
Giamatti, I’m going to immediately start thinking “Oscar” and March doesn’t quite reach that vaunted
mark. If, however, you can go in with managed expectations, you will be
rewarded with a solid, quality, good
political thriller that will keep you engrossed even if you’ve seen the twists
a hundred times before.